It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A B757 hit the Pentagon, reported by GOFER06

page: 32
62
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

So, the gate agents that checked in the passengers and then closed out Flight 77 don't exist. The Tower Personnel at Dulles who gave taxi/take off instructions to Flight 77 do not exist. The radar data that shows Flight 77 from takeoff/crash does not exist. The recovery personnel who documented removing human remains from what was left of airliner seats do not exist. The records matching those remains to the same people who the gate agents checked into Flight 77 do not exist (they do, they are not public domain information however). The thousands of recovery workers to picked up airliner wreckage do not exist. The reporters on the scene who described airliner wreckage do not exist. The people in the Reagan National Tower who watched Flight 77 slam into the Pentagon do not exist. The crew of Gofer06 who saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon do not exist. The men and women in and around the Pentagon who watched an airliner hit the Pentagon do not exist......

There is a deception going on....but it is not about what hit the Pentagon that day...
edit on 31-3-2017 by cardinalfan0596 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine

Just as Bob Dylan doesn't need a weatherman to tell him which way the wind is blowing, I don't need a newsman to tell me if I've been deceived, especially 15 years after the event.

That is, I don't know what happened to "the passengers". Neither you nor the government can prove that any passengers boarded. In this case you cannot prove that AA77 hit the building, and the bulk of the evidence available contradicts that claim. The "passengers" may be nothing more than actors in an elaborate play.

Exactly what happened to them does not change the fact that a great deception was pulled off that day. You must not yet realize that you too were deceived, but I do know I was deceived.



I agree that you don't know. I was asking about your theory. When one has a theory, one should not have to resort to "I dunno what happened but there is a conspiracy in there somewhere." That is not a theory at all.
Indeed, all the evidence supports that AA77 hit the Pentagon. The actors in the elaborate play were buried.

Do try to use your imagination, a little, when coming up with conspiracies.



posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: charlyv

Isn't that the same lamp ballast we had pics of years ago (subject of some discussion and disagreement at the time) ?

It does actually say AA and provides a serial number as well, flying in the face of those who claim those things don't exist


Yes, it was always an official FBI pic, but is just a tidbit when you see the actual amount of 757 airframe, skin and seat debris inside the building. The link also has some pics never released.



posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   
A reply to: pale5218


There is nothing unusual with what I have heard or seen. I don't observe anything that raises concern or questions with what is in this data except for Minetas testimony. I have not seen or heard anything that supports the FAA or military knowing enough info to inform the PEOC where Cheney and Mineta were.


pale5218, I do feel your confusion, and I understand it.
It's difficult to switch from trust to doubt.
Do realize that there are so many indicators for a false flag operation on a never before seen scale, that you have to throw your unconditional trust in your superiors overboard, and start thinking from another angle of incidence, based on what you have read online over the past years, regarding clear false flag indicators. You should start with this :

--If we are being bamboozled on 9/11/2001, then I, pale5218, have to expect, in my neck of the woods too (FAA, NORAD and so on), some very sophisticated bending of data by people in key positions who created years of delay tactics before they reluctantly FOIA freed, bit by little bit, f.ex. that military conference information, which they heavily redacted first.--

Then you should not forget to take in consideration that 25 NoC flight path eyewitnesses, interviewed on the day itself and shortly after again by the Military History Units and the Library of Congress people, can not all be wrong.
And if they are right, and their video interviews by CIT in 2006 prove that with no doubt in my mind, then the whole official story is totally bogus.

I provide the SCRIBD document again, for better understanding and for checking the planned confusion out, all for yourselves :
9/11 Attacks Air Threat Conference Call : Transcript.

Do read page 145, especially these 2 italic sentences :

The original transcription was incomplete. The pages between the red and green flags (pp169-192) reflect the previously non-transcribed portion.
Page 169 holds the "DDO : FAA reports UAL93 is down" message.
Page 193 holds the "NORAD : we have a single E-3 AWACS on location over D.C."
This italics is military repair-speak for : Damn! We lost some important things! Let's fill it in the way WE like it.

The entire transcription was redone by USD(I) staff in conjunction with Joint Staff because there were many inaccuracies in the original.
This italics is military repair-speak for : Damn! What we saw we didn't like, so we rewrote the damn thing ourselves until we DID like it.
USD(I) = Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Joint Staff = All top Brass.

Be warned, reading this heavily redacted transcript from page 147 and on : You are being bamboozled.!

Sadly enough, there's no timings connected to this document, however, some can be deducted from the info given. Abbreviations can be deducted mostly from the document itself.

Let's make up a presence protocol first, to find out when the FAA was connected to all these military guys (timings are guessed(g) ) :

-- g 09:02 - 09:09 Start by Command Center (NORAD?), convened by DDO Capt Leidig NMCC, National Military Command Center. (page 147)
-- g 09:38 - 09:40 DDO : there's a report that an aircraft has crashed into the Mall side of the Pentagon. (page 151)
-- g 09:45 PEOC down under the White House instructs Night Hawk Control to Stand by. DDO still waiting on Sec Def (Rumsfeld) (page 152)
-- g 09:46 PEOC : The Vice President (Cheney) is currently planning to evacuate to the Naval Observatory. (LT : from the PEOC ?)
-- ?? NAOC : National, this is NAOC secondary. We are getting an emergency take off from Andrews. (page 153)
-- g 09:47 NORAD : Roger. National, this is NORAD. NORAD has indications from the continental NORAD region of a possible fourth hijack, Delta flight 89. Flight plan Boston to Las Vegas. (page 154)

Timing uncertain :
-- Page 155 : they were still frantically searching for Gen. Myers (Chief Joint Staff) and Rumsfeld (Sec. Def. ) These two top brass commanders were clearly avoiding any blame.
-- Page 158 : NORAD : Suggest the DDO consider that the aircraft south of Cleveland heading west may have as its objective the Sears Tower in Chicago. Information on the location of the aircraft is limited. But it seems prudent that we might take measures to evacuate that facility.
(LT : that's UAL93). DDO : Attempts to get the FAA into the conference.
-- Page 163 : PEOC : From the JOC we just heard that we have an inbound that's 25 minutes out and my questions, the fighter assets out at Andrews have we given them the word?
They are still trying to get the FAA into the conference on a different telephone line. (LT : that's UAL93 again)
-- Page 165 : JOC says hijacked plane 25 minutes out from DC, but NORAD says that it has no indication of a hijack heading to Washington, D.C. at this time. (LT : which smells fishy).
-- Page 166 : PEOC : Word I got from the JOC is we got a united flight 93 out of pittsburgh about 20 minutes out. FAA has not made contact with it yet, though they've tried. So, that's an unknown at this time.
(LT : here they admit to have been in contact with the FAA all the time, but through other means, or on a different tel. line.)
-- Page 167 : PEOC: DDO, PEOC. Is FAA in on this conference?
DDO: This is the DDO. The FAA is not in this conference. We have been unable to get them in. We have them on a separate line here in the NMCC.
PEOC: Can you just clarify with them information on
--Page 168 : United flight 93?
DDO : This is the DDO. We're doing that at this time.
PEOC: DDO, stand by for more information on that inbound.
DDO: This is the DDO. Go ahead.
PEOC: We've got confirmation of an airplane 60 miles out. We think it is Flight United 93. Apparently, we're hearing weapons freeze right now. Do you know what the status of the Atlantic City assets are right now?
(LT : Then some asking around about jet fighters)
PEOC: DDO, this is PEOC. The Vice President has just confirmed fighters are cleared to engage the aircraft.
--Page 169 : inbound if we can verify that it is, in fact, the hijacked aircraft. Can you confirm with FAA? DDO: This is the DDO. I'm checking with the FAA at this time.
(LT : They wanted NAOC airborne, and some AWACS over Louisiana, then this : )
-- g 10:03 to 10:06 DDO: FAA report of aircraft down in Pennsylvania.

We may assume that the report of an aircraft that crashed in the Mall side of the Pentagon at 09:38 came already from the FAA, over that different telephone line and was relayed to the DDO that way. They knew it first through their control tower at Reagan Int Airport who had direct sight to the crash site.

--Page 170 : we have these 2 lines to confirm that the FAA at last was connected directly into the conference call, just after UAL93 crashed in Shanksville :
NMCC: FAA, this is the NMCC are you in the conference?
FAA: The FAA is here.

Conclusion : the FAA was connected to the military its telephone conference call, however, up till the crash of UAL93, only through a second separate line, apart from all the others and they were only briefed and probed probably by just one military person.
Ask around who that person was...



posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

What does this have to do with proving, or discrediting a missile hitting the pentagon?

What does that have to do with discrediting the 80 plus eyewitnesses that gave an account of a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon?

What does that have to do with the landing gear, seats, personal effects and human remains of the passengers ending up at the pentagon?

What does this have to do with the video work by David Chandler and Ken Jenkins that shows a passenger jet hit the pentagon?

Blink Comparator Views of
the Plane at the Pentagon
By David Chandler, based on prior work by Ken Jenkins

911speakout.org...

Conspiracists' inability to believe the scores of people and victims that give an account of a jet hitting the pentagon is hurting the movement. Sad to see the truth movement's inability to control their bias and pushing people away that want truth.

9/11 Debunked: 136 Eyewitnesses to Pentagon Attack
youtu.be...

edit on 31-3-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed finger fumbles.



posted on Mar, 31 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: pale5218

Thank you for your hard work and great responses. Just remember, some people don't understand the truth movement will do and say anything to stay relevant. The truth movement will post anything on YouTube that will generate likes and notoriety. The 9/11 conspiracies are more about faith than truth at this point.


What do they gain from it?

I see it as an insult to the people who lost their lives that day.




Last I heard AE911 turned over half a million dollars a year out of which Richard Gage paid himself eighty five thousand a year.

Figures...

Another cult...

Easy money, fleece the sheep...
edit on 31-3-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: mrthumpy

originally posted by: D8Tee

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: pale5218

Thank you for your hard work and great responses. Just remember, some people don't understand the truth movement will do and say anything to stay relevant. The truth movement will post anything on YouTube that will generate likes and notoriety. The 9/11 conspiracies are more about faith than truth at this point.


What do they gain from it?

I see it as an insult to the people who lost their lives that day.




Last I heard AE911 turned over half a million dollars a year out of which Richard Gage paid himself eighty five thousand a year.

Figures...

Another cult...

Easy money, fleece the sheep...


There's good reason for some to keep the controversy alive and they get a lot of help with that for free



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

Thank you at least for admitting whatever "records" you refer to are not to be examined by anybody other than "government officials".

Let's put it this way: I do not consider statements from pentagon sources to be trustworthy. This was a false flag operation all the way.

Nothing there looked like a crashed airliner, and between Cimino and other facts, the evidence contradicts the official story.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: pteridine

Sorry, I missed that you wanted my theory.

My theory is that certain elements within the Israeli government, for exact reasons unbeknownst to me, wanted to attack the US, and had sufficient influence within that government, such as Dov Zakheim and other dual citizens, to plan and execute this attack. Again, I can only speculate about their true motivations and goals, but certainly war in the middle east and the subsequent destabilization in the area was one of the goals.

Christopher Bollyn has done much research about this, and I have read both his books on the subject. By way of his own writing and research, we know that Transtech Control Ltd is an Israeli company with important contracts with major airports in the US, including several involved in 911.

The work of Eastman, Flocco, Durham, Schwarz and E.P. Heidner also helps explain another probable reason for the attacks, and they involved manipulations of government issued securities, and Office Of Naval Intelligence was involved in certain investigations, and that was the part of the pentagon that was attacked.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 02:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine

Sorry, I missed that you wanted my theory.

My theory is that certain elements within the Israeli government, for exact reasons unbeknownst to me, wanted to attack the US, and had sufficient influence within that government, such as Dov Zakheim and other dual citizens, to plan and execute this attack. Again, I can only speculate about their true motivations and goals, but certainly war in the middle east and the subsequent destabilization in the area was one of the goals.

Christopher Bollyn has done much research about this, and I have read both his books on the subject. By way of his own writing and research, we know that Transtech Control Ltd is an Israeli company with important contracts with major airports in the US, including several involved in 911.

The work of Eastman, Flocco, Durham, Schwarz and E.P. Heidner also helps explain another probable reason for the attacks, and they involved manipulations of government issued securities, and Office Of Naval Intelligence was involved in certain investigations, and that was the part of the pentagon that was attacked.



That is your theoretical reason behind the attack. Do you still hold that a commercial airliner was not part of the attack or could it be that it was and the reason behind the attack was as you suggest?



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 02:27 PM
link   
a reply to: pteridine


Yes, commercial airliners were involved that day, or at least had airliner paint jobs on them, because I knew a guy who accidentally saw one the morning of.

Yes airliners were part of the story, to be sure. One of the funnier parts was that the passenger manifests were initially incomplete, but later edited for "accuracy".

Trouble is what transport category aircraft the public saw, the one hitting the south tower, was a done, not an airliner.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: pteridine


Yes, commercial airliners were involved that day, or at least had airliner paint jobs on them, because I knew a guy who accidentally saw one the morning of.

Yes airliners were part of the story, to be sure. One of the funnier parts was that the passenger manifests were initially incomplete, but later edited for "accuracy".

Trouble is what transport category aircraft the public saw, the one hitting the south tower, was a done, not an airliner.



Ok, cite a source passenger lists were changed. And also prove it wasn't due to last minute walk ons and and as passengers on standby got seats. Not everything is a freaking conspiracy.......



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Oh he will post about the initial victim's lists and confuse those with the passenger manifests. Been down that road before.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 03:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Nothing that looks like a crashed airliner? Haven't seen many airliners then have you? I have no problems finding 757 wheel hubs, RB-211 engine chambers, APU access doors, landing gear struts.. etc in the photos at the Pentagon.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: LaBTop
A reply to: pale5218


pale5218, I do feel your confusion, and I understand it.
It's difficult to switch from trust to doubt.
Do realize that there are so many indicators for a false flag operation on a never before seen scale, that you have to throw your unconditional trust in your superiors overboard, and start thinking from another angle of incidence, based on what you have read online over the past years, regarding clear false flag indicators. You should start with this :

If we are being bamboozled on 9/11/2001, then I, pale5218, have to expect, in my neck of the woods too (FAA, NORAD and so on), some very sophisticated bending of data by people in key positions who created years of delay tactics before they reluctantly FOIA freed, bit by little bit, f.ex. that military conference information, which they heavily redacted first.


I wouldn't label it as confusion. I could maybe consider 'under informed', 'misinformed' and certainly outside the inner circle of knowledge. I will say I don't know what really happened because I don't think everything we have been told is true and that we have been told everything. I just don't think it's confusion.

You are right, if they are bamboozling us then they have the sophistication to do it. I just don't think it's prudent to fill in the gaps when there is missing info. What I was trying to show is empirical data to show one aspect of the event and I still have to stand by what I see.



Do read page 145, especially these 2 italic sentences :

The original transcription was incomplete. The pages between the red and green flags (pp169-192) reflect the previously non-transcribed portion.
Page 169 holds the "DDO : FAA reports UAL93 is down" message.
Page 193 holds the "NORAD : we have a single E-3 AWACS on location over D.C."
This italics is military repair-speak for : Damn! We lost some important things! Let's fill it in the way WE like it.

The entire transcription was redone by USD(I) staff in conjunction with Joint Staff because there were many inaccuracies in the original.
This italics is military repair-speak for : Damn! What we saw we didn't like, so we rewrote the damn thing ourselves until we DID like it.
USD(I) = Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Joint Staff = All top Brass.


Interesting reading 169-193 and beyond. I was reading new information but it doesn't contradict what the video and audio in the tapes provide. Both the Air Threat and DDO conferences could have been changed and written the way they wanted. They also could have be redone because they were previously non-transcribed and/or hold many inaccuracies but unless we have the previous version(s), it is speculation to say what was done.

The transcription, if anything it does support the way it was unfolding with the FAA and NORAD audio tapes. There is nothing in the Conferences held with the DDO, NORAD, Air Force, PEOC that changes what has been revealed by the other data. It does show that there is approval to use fighters if any unidentified aircraft threatened DC but this was already known. It has been reported and I don't think there was any refusal that this was given.



We may assume that the report of an aircraft that crashed in the Mall side of the Pentagon at 09:38 came already from the FAA, over that different telephone line and was relayed to the DDO that way. They knew it first through their control tower at Reagan Int Airport who had direct sight to the crash site.

--Page 170 : we have these 2 lines to confirm that the FAA at last was connected directly into the conference call, just after UAL93 crashed in Shanksville :
NMCC: FAA, this is the NMCC are you in the conference?
FAA: The FAA is here.

Conclusion : the FAA was connected to the military its telephone conference call, however, up till the crash of UAL93, only through a second separate line, apart from all the others and they were only briefed and probed probably by just one military person.
Ask around who that person was...


It wasn't a secret that communication was being done with the FAA from the ATC System Command Center and the military. They were gathering information through updates from the Air Route Traffic Control Centers and providing this info to military. The ATCSCC was central to the communication because of their ability to coordinate and gather this info. The updates included Cleveland Center when they working UAL93, the controllers were able to track this flight as primary target.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 02:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Salander

Nothing that looks like a crashed airliner? Haven't seen many airliners then have you? I have no problems finding 757 wheel hubs, RB-211 engine chambers, APU access doors, landing gear struts.. etc in the photos at the Pentagon.


You have a vivid imagination. All I saw were parts from a single engine aircraft, likely drone.

If one considers the landing gear assemblies on the runway at SFO a few years back where the guy landed short, there was nothing like that at the DoD. No baggage, no bodies, just a smoldering building, you're welcome.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

So you compare an airliner landing short and landing speed, to an airliner that slammed into a building at high speed, and you think that the results are going to be the same?

Let me guess, you thought you would keep your doctor too?



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: cardinalfan0596

I compare the visible existence of massive landing gear and engines, as was seen in SFO, to be an essential part of what is seen when such an airplane crashes.

There was nothing resembling that at the pentagon, and that is corroborated by the faux FDR information.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

So again, you think an airliner at landing speed, hitting the ground is going to result in the same exact style of wreckage as a high speed impact into a wall.



posted on Apr, 3 2017 @ 06:26 PM
link   
A reply to: pale5218


Pale5218,
First : After every State sponsored false flag operation, there will operate an aftermath collateral damage control unit, busy for many years with neutralizing the unavoidable small and bigger loose ends.

Second : Luckily we have Dennis Cimino, a professional DFDR decoder, who told us not to trust that "recovered" DFDR from Flight AAL77, because it was clearly written to, when placed in a bench setting, to be read out. It's STRICTLY forbidden to write to an accident DFDR.
ANY write-operation on a recovered DFDR is a clear proof of tampering with evidence.

He is another factor in the Pentagon-9/11 discussion that provides you with evidence that 9/11 was a sophisticated planned and worked out false flag operation by parts of the US military in combination with parts of the then responsible US Administration.
The remarkable conclusion is however, that next Administrations keep the curtains up too.

Dennis his professional DFDR analysis knowledge ;
like the CIT Team its 13 AAL77 NoC witness interviews ;
like Susan McElwain's video interview ;
like Viola Saylor her interview of UAL93 flying 10 x lower than its DFDR data shows at the spot above her home, easy to calculate back from the impact crater, in fact at tree top level ;
like the WTC7 its 2.25 secs of free fall acceleration ;
and like the WTC7 its seismic and photographic evidence combined ;

Were unpredictable factors, the 9/11 planners had not counted on, in their meticulous pre and aftermath planning.


This is a link to Dennis Cimino his only left over Part 4 explanations regarding AAL77 its DFDR, that I could find online, to this date :


Dennis Cimino : Many discrepancies existed with that Flight Data Recorder record and the N.T.S.B. recreation. First, the final flight path of the plane the government says was flown, does NOT MATCH this record. This is not an assertion. This is a fact.
Second, the FDR itself was found `twice' at the Pentagon. Now for those of you who are unfamiliar with the actual location of the unit on the American Boeing 757 aircraft, it is in the tail of the plane to preserve it for as long as possible as most planes do not crash `tail first' into anything even if the government claims the box can quit without provocation or reason, six seconds before impact with anything. The unit was found both at the entry hole, and deep in the building, underneath more or less `intact' pilot seats. This is a bit problematic in the sense that the box itself has insufficient mass to penetrate the building on it's own without help after the severe deceleration of the plane as it struck the heavily reinforced `Catcher's Mit' outer wall with the Kevlar jacketing and, furthermore, how did it get found `twice' when only ONE flight data recorder exists on this plane?
What is even a better question, is how did the data in the crash protected memory module get downloaded from the crash protected solid state memory a full DAY before the discovery of the unit on the premises? That's right from the time stamp on the data given to us by the N.T.S.B. Now I know that you're thinking; "oh, someone forgot to set the time on the system that downloaded the data then, obviously."
Well, unfortunately there is a very precise process for setting the derivation bench system to take that data from a crash system and download it, and part of that process means you cross check the time the system says it is at. And most assuredly, there are many many other safeguards that are done to ensure that the data is not written to. Unfortunately for this data record set, it was written to. And that was not accidental.
The reason we know this, is that the only way data in the file header or preamble could be erased or reset to `zeroes' is that the requisite jumper wire required on the bench setup that would be used to dump the CPM or crash protected memory data from the recovered CPM module, had to be in place when it would have been both not normally there at all and an intentional `addition' by someone, and second, the bench unit used to talk to or communicate with the CPM module would not have any AIRCRAFT ID or FLEET ID data loaded into it as a NOT FOR FLIGHT unit, and upon connection with the never ever ever in place jumper wire EXCEPT FOR INTENT TO WRITE operations which would be prohibited by any reasonable data extraction protocols for a crash unit, the jumper had to be there to ERASE these two critical links to the plane itself that would not otherwise be blank. On this unit's FDR data, both fields are inexplicably `blank' or zero'd out.


In case his readers would still have some doubts left that Dennis could forget some other details which could still make it possible that this DFDR in reality still was the in VIRGIN STATE recovered DFDR, Dennis adds some more solid arguments to convince his readers that this unit WAS written to, instead of solely read out :


On bootstrap, the FDR does a BIT TEST or built in test function. Part of this BIT test is to validate the header / preamble data in the front of the file in the non-compressed portion of the CPM memory data, against the FDR UNIT's own ROM values for AC ID and FLEET ID. In the case these do not match on bootstrap, the FDR sends a `FDR FAIL' or command priority message to both EICAS flight displays in the cockpit. Furthermore, the pre-download checklist used by ANY agency downloading CPM memory module data stipulates that the requisite PIN JUMPERS to enable a CPM module write operation be verified ABSENT or NOT IN PLACE to prevent accidental record modification or data erasure. The only way the AC ID and FLEET ID data could be zero'd out on this box is that the jumper on the bench unit used to extract the data, was, in fact, there. That was the LAST linkage of that file to the airplane known as N644AA, other than serial numbers the F.B.I. and N.T.S.B. repeatedly refuse to provide to us under very specially and properly written F.O.I.A. requests. In any case, if this data was somehow erased or zero'd out by some technician before that aircraft took off, the unit would have failed BIT on power up on the airplane's essential bus, and that is a `no go' situation. Only a not for flight unit would write `zero's to that header and preamble data, and only a NOT FOR FLIGHT unit would ignore the BIT failure due to masking in the BIT ERROR MAP of the unit. In all likelihood, on this particular airplane, the FDR would have been a Sunstrand model 700 FDR, versus the L-3 Model 2100 unit, based on data from other aircraft in the production string. Are we to believe that this machine got the L-3 unit and the sister ships produced on the line got the others by accident? I don't think that's too very realistic, although it is possible. An FDR FAIL message is a "no push-back" for any Part 23 airplane, prohibiting flight.


This all comes from this 858 posts long 2012 discussion :
at the Amazon.com its Customer Discussions > Science forum.



new topics

top topics



 
62
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join